ATMORE v. MINCEY et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
MACON DIVISION
WILLIE JAMES ATMORE, :
:
Plaintiff, :
v. : Case No. 5:25-cv-520-MTT-ALS
:
Judge DAVID L. MINCEY, et al., :
:
Defendants. :
________________________________ :
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
Plaintiff Willie James Atmore, a person currently confined at Central State Hospital, filed
a pro se complaint seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc. 1). On December 2, 2025, Plaintiff
was directed to sign his complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 and refile the
signed document with the Court. Plaintiff was given fourteen (14) days to comply, and he was
warned that the failure to fully and timely comply with the Court’s notice could result in the
dismissal of his complaint. See Notice of Deficiency, Dec. 2, 2025.
The time for compliance passed, and Plaintiff did not sign and refile his complaint. Instead
of complying with the notice of deficiency, Plaintiff filed two affidavits (Docs. 5, 6) and a motion
for reconsideration (Doc. 7). None of these filings provide any explanation regarding why Plaintiff
failed to comply with the Court’s December 2, 2025 notice of deficiency. Further, Plaintiff’s
motion for reconsideration is almost completely illegible, and it is not clear what Plaintiff wishes
the Court to reconsider. (Doc. 7). The Court has not entered an Order in this action. There is,
therefore, nothing for the Court to reconsider.1 Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration
(Doc. 7) is DENIED as moot.
1Plaintiff’s affidavits and motion for reconsideration show this civil action number and two additional civil action
numbers, 5:25-cv-519-CAR-ALS and 5:25-cv-521-CAR-ALS. See Docs. 5, at 1; 6, at 1; 7, at 1. In the future, Plaintiff
Case 5:25-cv-00520-MTT-ALS Document 8 Filed 02/02/26 Page 1 of 2

2
Rule 11 requires the Court to “strike an unsigned paper unless the omission is promptly
corrected after being called to the . . . party’s attention[,]” and the failure to comply with the orders
and instructions of the Court is also grounds for dismissal. Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(a), 41(b).
Consequently, Plaintiff is ORDERED to RESPOND and SHOW CAUSE why his complaint
should not be dismissed for his failure to fully comply with Rule 11 and the Court’s notice of
deficiency. As explained in the notice of deficiency, Plaintiff must also sign and refile his
complaint if he wishes to proceed with this action. Plaintiff shall have FOURTEEN (14) DAYS
from the date of this Order to respond and also to file his signed complaint. Plaintiff is also
reminded of his obligation to notify the Court in writing of any change in his mailing address.
Failure to respond to this Order and to file his signed complaint will likely result in the
dismissal of Plaintiff’s complaint for failure to comply. There shall be no service of process
until further order of the Court.
SO ORDERED, this 2nd day of February, 2026.
s/ ALFREDA L. SHEPPARD
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
must prepare and file separate pleadings in each of his pending cases as opposed to placing numerous civil action
numbers on one pleading and expecting the Court to file the pleading in all the listed actions.
Case 5:25-cv-00520-MTT-ALS Document 8 Filed 02/02/26 Page 2 of 2